Posts Tagged by barack obama
Total Donations by Active Military – 3Q YTD 2011 – Ron Paul Leads ALL
| November 30, 2011 | Posted by Sandra Crosnoe under Feature Post, OKG Projects, Social Networking |
|
Total Donations by Active Military – 3Q YTD 2011
Ron Paul $113,739
Obama $68,661
Romney $11,555
All other candidates less than $10k see graphic for more detail. Ron Paul is the military’s “top tier” candidate.
Cross Posted on Constitutional Liberty Coalition
H/T to RonPaulForums for graphic.
Filed under: R3publicans #R3S Tagged: Active Military, barack obama, Constitutional Liberty Coalition, Globalist Newt Gingrich, Herman Cain, Jon Huntsman, Michele Bachmann, military donations, Millitary's Top Tier Candidate, Mitt Romney, R3publicans, Rick Santorum, Ron Paul, Ron Paul 2012, RonPaulForums
Obama owes Caroline Kennedy Big Time
| November 29, 2011 | Posted by Doug Wead under Oklahoma County, Social Networking |
|
Forget the $16 trillion national debt. Forget what we owe China. The greatest unpaid debt of Barack Obama, perhaps the greatest unpaid political debt of all time, is what the president owes Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg, the daughter to John F. Kennedy.
Every day that passes with this debt unpaid, is a day of shame for Barack Obama. And it is an object lesson for any who imagine that their own future support will be honored. If he can stiff Caroline Kennedy, he can stiff anybody.
It was Caroline Kennedy who made supporting Barack Obama fashionable. Her endorsement, which came on January 27, 2008 gave his candidacy the credibility and legitimacy it was lacking. It came at a time when Hillary Clinton was poised to nail down the Democrat nomination for president. As Kennedy’s father said after the Bay of Pigs disaster, “Failure is an orphan, but victory has a thousand fathers.” There are many who claim that they elected Barack Obama but no one has a greater claim than Caroline Kennedy.
For much of her life, Caroline Kennedy lived in mystery. While others sought fame she sought anonymity and privacy. In the process she became even more popular. She was a blank slate that others could write upon. And she was never lured into public to disabuse them of their notions. She sacrificed all of that in January, 2008, when she wrote her endorsement of Barack Obama.
The candidate appeared to honor that support the following December. A deal was arranged to have Mrs. Kennedy appointed to the vacated New York Senate seat. Caroline was trotted out onto television to talk about it. Her appearances were disastrous, making Sarah Palin cerebral by comparison. In only a matter of minutes, a woman whose dignity and mystery gave her a persona that transcended her White House childhood, was reduced from legendary to ordinary.
The Obama team bristled at the suggestion that they had not prepared her. She was a Kennedy, they said, the family practically invented modern politics. She had failed her audition at the New York Times. She had offended Governor Patterson, the man who would have to appoint her. It was her fault, not theirs.
A few months later Barack Obama tried again. The White House started floating Caroline Kennedy’s name as a possible ambassador to the Vatican. It was such a glaring political misjudgment that some now question the sincerity of the effort. Kennedy friend, Ray Flynn, the former Democrat mayor of Boston and the last Ambassador to the Vatican was aghast. Mrs. Kennedy ‘s pro abortion position would not fly in Rome, he warned, what were they thinking? Predictably the Church rebuffed her nomination.
This time, it was clear that the Obama White House had let her down. It is one thing to ignore a political debt. It is another to punish someone who has done you a great service.
In March, 2011, Obama finally appointed Mrs. Kennedy’s husband, Edwin Schlossberg, to the president’s commission on fine arts. It made eyes roll. It is one of thousands of honorific positions the White House passes out to lower level supporters and their friends. A third year into a presidency these positions are the scraps that have fallen to the floor and are often turned down.
Caroline Kennedy would not be the first presidential child to go unthanked for helping elect a president. Robert Tyler, son and personal assistant to his father, President John Tyler, left the White House to become prominent in Pennsylvania politics. Eventually Tyler befriended James Buchanan and encouraged him and coached him in his long career. During Buchanan’s’ run for office, Tyler was at this side, giving him a perspective that no one else could offer. But when Buchanan became president he promptly dropped Tyler. There is only one president and any other light that shines too brightly will not be tolerated. Tyler, like Mrs. Kennedy, never complained.
The perfect position for Caroline Kennedy, the obvious position, is the Court of St. James, that is ambassador to Great Britain. It is the position held by her grandfather and her uncle. It is a position that honors tradition and royalty. But Mrs. Kennedy, who wrote in her endorsement that Obama reminded her of her father, has obviously misjudged her man.
“And when it comes to judgment,” Mrs. Kennedy wrote, “Barack Obama made the right call on the most important issue of our time by opposing the war in Iraq from the beginning.”
Like much of her endorsement of Obama, it is all now only ironic. Obama has been a war president, making Republican and Democrat foreign policy virtually indistinguishable from the other. There is no New Deal, or Great Frontier. There is only old Republican style cronyism. Students must pay back their education loans at 8% interest, while members of the Federal Reserve Board can award themselves billions in interest free loans to prop up their banks.
“Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.” The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Filed under: Democrats, Presidential Children, Presidential History Tagged: Ambassador, Barack Obama, Caroline Kennedy 
Ron Paul the Gold Standard of Presidential Politics at Reagan Dinner in Iowa on Nov 4th
| November 5, 2011 | Posted by Sandra Crosnoe under Christian Ministry, Economy, Events, Events Spotlighted, History, President 2012, ProLife, Social Networking, Washington County |
|
Rand Paul introduces his father from long distance for this important dinner in Iowa. Ron Paul’s remarks include a few personal experiences with Ronald Reagan and a little insight into the gold standard, economic policy, foreign policy, and a strong national defense. He has recommended $1 Trillion in the first year of his presidency and eliminate 5 departments including the department of education. Enjoy his refreshing comments amidst a very friendly crowd at the Reagan dinner in Iowa.
Des Moines, Iowa
Hy-Vee Hall
November 4, 2011
Posted by Sandra Crosnoe for Finding Gems & Sharing Them
Cross-posted with R3publicans
Herman Cain Flip Flops on Killing Al Awlaki
| October 3, 2011 | Posted by Doug Wead under Social Networking |
|
Fox News spent a whole Sunday segment on the legality of President Obama’s killing of Al Awlaki, an American citizen. Bill Kristol chuckled condescendingly and said that no candidate except for Ron Paul is complaining about it and therefore it is a non-issue. Kristol implied that the killing was legal and morally justified. Everyone else on the panel agreed. No one explained why they spent a whole segment talking about something that was supposed to be a non-issue.
But it turns out that Bill Kristol was wrong. Herman Cain was asked about the killing of Al Awlaki several months ago and stated clearly that it was wrong and unconstitutional. I am posting the Youtube of the Herman Cain interview below for you to see for yourself.
So get this straight. President Obama must get a federal judge to sign a warrant before he can listen in on the telephone conversations of an American citizen but he can kill an American citizen without it. He just need support from the American news media.
Interesting.
This is about as far from the U. S. Constitution and Bill of Rights as one can get. This is running the country by the news media and a popular leader.
Ron Paul made it very clear today that he condemns what Al Awlaki did and what he stands for. He voted to go into Afghanistan and to hunt down Osama Bin Laden. But he pointed out that even with Timothy McVeigh, we brought him to trial and he was convicted by a jury and sentenced by a judge. And he was executed. He was not killed on an order of the president.
During the Nuremberg Trials the prosecution took great pains to show how Nazi Germany started its fall into the abyss. A great amount of time was taken to explain how gullible the German people were to accept Hitler’s actions during the Blood Purge when Ernst Rohm and other SA leaders were summarily killed without trial. This should have been a warning, the court was told. Instead it was applauded by the population. After all, the men that Hitler had killed were bad men.
One of the four major counts against the Nuremberg defendants was the waging of an aggressive (preemptive) war. It is now our American foreign policy.
We are at an interesting point in our history. It is worth a discussion before we race ahead.
Filed under: Presidential History Tagged: Al Awlaki, Barack Obama, herman cain, Ron Paul
Jon Huntsman’s Secret Plot to Win in 2012
| September 15, 2011 | Posted by Doug Wead under Social Networking |
|
The conventional wisdom is that Jon Huntsman, former governor of Utah and presidential candidate, is being played by his political handlers. According to this narrative, they are taking the billionaire for the biggest paycheck of their lives. They are telling him that he can bypass Iowa, play to the middle and the media, like John McCain did in 2008, pull an upset in New Hampshire and ride his dark horse to the nomination. This presupposes that the billionaire has a gargantuan ego, is a political dolt and that his handlers are superhuman con men. Having watched Huntsman in action during these debates and knowing some of his paid handlers, none of the three seem plausible to me.
So what is Jon Huntsman trying to do? If he can’t win why is he in this presidential race? And why were NBC executives so willing to help him in the last Republican debate, making sure their producers and directors got the message “puff Huntsman” signaling the anchors to keep going to him again and again with softball questions? Why should a contender who is running dead last in the polls get such fawning attention and respect from NBC, of all places?
Governor Huntsman announced for president last June 21, with poise and class, acting oblivious to the anti-Mormon bias in the GOP ranks in Iowa and the South. Hadn’t he learned anything watching Mitt Romney suffer through that process in the last cycle? Was he really going to split the Mormon vote in Nevada and ruin Romney’s legitimate chances there? And then he dissed his own religion. Huh? What serious candidate knocks his own base? And yet, unperturbed, Huntsman has remained suntanned and relaxed throughout the process, ignoring the coming losses with a transcendent confidence.
Nothing that has happened so far should be feeding that confidence. The governor garnered only 69 votes in the Iowa Straw Poll. Write-in candidates not even on the ballot got more votes than Huntsman. He was the butt of Jon Stewart jokes. He is, even now, running at 2% in some Republican presidential preference polls. Dead last among the contenders. He never fails to tell his GOP audiences that he believes in climate change, which won him kudos yesterday from Al Gore. He loves telling evangelical Christian audiences in Iowa and South Carolina that he believes in evolution. In fact, he has brought the subject up, unsolicited, in the last two national debates. It seems that Huntsman has some monkey business on the brain.
So what is going on?
Here is the answer my friends, Jon Huntsman is running for a cabinet position in Barack Obama’s second term as president. He will let his GOP rivals pile on. He will let the GOP audiences sneer. He will remain the gentleman, above the mean spirited debate around him. And he will bask in the glory afforded him by an adoring mainstream media, who favors Obama’s re-election anyway. And when duly re-elected Barack Obama, declared by the Sienna Institute to be the 15th greatest president of all time, will grandly announce to the American people, “I am going to keep my promise, I am going to do everything I can to unite this country, even to the point of naming a Republican to my cabinet” he will call for Jon Huntsman. Obama will be shown reaching all the way across the aisle to the GOP to pick one of their own presidential contenders as his new Secretary of Commerce. Only he really won’t have to reach very far to get his man. And Huntsman is obviously not “contending” for the nomination. The media, with a straight face, will say “what a bipartisan, statesman-like gesture by our dear president.”
Jon Huntsman has all the credentials to be in an Obama cabinet. He is a second generation billionaire who knows how to be play the game. He was Ambassador to Singapore for George Herbert Walker Bush and Ambassador to China for Barack Obama. And that means he understands well that former Ambassadors, from time immemorial, especially when they are wealthy, are expected to pay for their position after the president leaves office. After all, an ambassador keeps his title for life. It is the closest thing we have to royalty in America. And if the president should die, the ambassador should be very generous to his family. It is like a Lord and his King. A former president, for example, should be able to count on the use of the former ambassador’s corporate jet, or the box seats at a favorite sporting event, or a plush position on the board of directors of one of the billionaire’s companies.
Huntsman must play this game especially well, since he has been “knighted” by both Republican and Democrat administrations. What can he do for an encore? Surely he does not want another Ambassadorship.
You can bet that you won’t hear Jon Hunstman echoing Ron Paul, Michelle Bachman and Rick Perry, calling for an audit of the Federal Reserve. His companies may need some of those billions, beyond the reach of the ordinary folks.
And for those who feel sorry for a very eloquent and intelligent man, who seems to have fallen way behind in the presidential race? Well, save your pity for another. Jon Huntsman is actually very far ahead in the race to be in President Obama’s next cabinet. Only Hillary Clinton and Leon Panetta are ahead of him. And there is a danger of getting too far out front, something that Clinton and Panetta know well and Huntsman should remember. So we should hear him step it up a bit with a little more partisan language. If he is going to be of any use for Obama he has to at least try to sound like a Republican.
It is all part of his plan. The only thing that can go wrong now? Well, one of the Republicans might win.
Filed under: Democrats, Presidential History, Republicans Tagged: Barack Obama, Cabinet, Jon Huntsman, Obama's cabinet
Deserving of Darts: President Obama and “Some rigid idea”
| September 9, 2011 | Posted by Stubborn_Facts under CD05, Feature Post, Oklahoma County, Social Networking |
|
Wow. President Obama and the question: Is he “Deserving of Darts”? Broad subject…right? We have never “awarded” Barack Obama this dubious GiN distinction before for one simple reason: once we’d get going, we’d be hard pressed to stop. The GiN Joint doesn’t have that many darts on the premises…in fact, we’d probably create a national dart shortage. The content of Thursday’s speech rolling out “The American Jobs Act”, provided a target-rich environment to be sure, but I honestly didn’t catch every word. I was frequently talking to my TV…frequently asking rhetorical questions of the President on the screen…frequently wondering aloud at the dizzy Democrats who applauded so many times…frequently expressing frustration about past Republican responses to similar policies. I didn’t start talking to the TV right away. It’s been a while since anything the President has said provoked that reaction from me. When I realized I was listening to practically the same speech I’d heard too many times in January and February 2009, realized I was listening to even more obviously absurd version of the February 2009 Stimulus push, I confess, I really lost my temper. It’s very important to understand that the February 2009 Stimulus is “the gift that keeps on giving”. Over two and a half years after that monstrosity’s passage, the facts about its damage to the economy, irresponsible spending, fueling of left-wing agendas, paybacks to political cronies, and its whitewash over state and local budgetary problems are still coming to light. Perhaps the most recent bit of information readers will recall involves the diversity manuals purchased by Omaha Public Schools. Our article “$130k for School Diversity Manuals Just the Tip of the Stimulus Iceberg” exposed much greater amounts of damaging spending than $130,000, and that article focused only on the Stimulus’ education spending. Ironically, we just referenced that article on Wednesday when we provided a visual example of such waste. And of course, we’ve written about the Stimulus bill many times before. Although I will not take the time to re-hash all of its problems here ( just those of which we are aware, anyway), I will point out two articles we’ve written because the ideas they include are very important and worth repeating:
- In July, we published “OF COURSE the Stimulus is Killing Jobs and Unemployment is Up” in which we highlighted an analysis by White House economists which included numbers that proved the February 2009 Stimulus was actually killing jobs.
- In March, we published “The State of Nebraska Has YOUR Medical Records: Next Up…the Feds“, in which we explained that the February 2009 Stimulus was actually historic health care legislation because it contained buried provisions to set up an entire medical records infrastructure, through government, and was a set up for the health care “reform”.
How many jobs would it have cost us if past Congresses decided not to support the basic research that led to the Internet and the computer chip? What kind of country would this be if this Chamber had voted down Social Security or Medicare just because it violated some rigid idea about what government could or could not do? How many Americans would have suffered as a result? (emphasis added)The embedded video, below, is the full speech. The President made the remarks above beginning at approximately 28 minutes, 25 seconds. Wow. What he is talking about? Let’s consult the experts.
Of course, we need the appropriate music as we ponder and write down our answer:
I know! I know!
scribble
scribble
scribble
scribble
For all of those who wrote down the correct answer:
I suppose we could call the Constitution “rigid” IF we would consider the idea that we should adhere to the rule of law rigid1.
What President Obama advocated in his speech generally and alluded to in his amazing “rigid” remark should not be misinterpreted as ignorance. As I wrote for A New America:
“A philosophy of positive rights epitomizes the Obama Administration. Barack Obama knows the Constitution, he just doesn’t agree with it.“To illustrate that point, I chose to include a clip from the following 2001 Chicago Public Radio interview: So let’s discard the facade. Re-read the President’s statement with the word Constitution substituted in the appropriate place:
What kind of country would this be if this Chamber had voted down Social Security or Medicare just because it violated the Constitution?Uh… Hmm… I don’t know – A financially solvent country? Peopled with citizens who assumed responsibility for themselves and their extended family members instead of lying to themselves that they can pay less into a system than they take out of it2 ? Oh, and maybe we’d have a country which wouldn’t keep telling people it will “keep its promises” when promises to someone will be broken, it’s just a matter of when and to whom.
- We suspect that “rigid” is the opposite of “living” regarding constitutional philosophy. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has provided some of the best articulations available in contemporary times regarding constitutional originalism the many problems with a “living constitution”. ↩
- According to the analysis referenced in the National Review article to which we linked, an example of an American couple is given that shows a 25% “return” on Social Security and Medicare payroll deductions. ↩
Rasmussen Shock Poll via Drudge Report: Obama 41% Paul 37%
| July 22, 2011 | Posted by Sandra Crosnoe under Events, News, OKG Projects, Social Networking |
|
And most amazingly a relatively positive report on Fox news today. Miracles do happen. Praise God and let's keep rolling folks! Continue reading Climate Change, Charlie Manson, and the CCCP!
| April 18, 2011 | Posted by houchen2010 under Social Networking |
|
‘Everyone’s God and if we don’t wake up to that there’s going to be no weather because our polar caps are melting because we’re doing bad things to the atmosphere…” — Charles Manson, 2011
Every now and then, even a blind squirrel finds a nut. Buried in an article published in the UK’s Daily Mail online edition is an article originally titled: “Killer Breaks 20 year Silence on 40th anniversary of gruesome Sharon Tate murders”. Immediately the words “HELTER SKELTER” jump to mind with the image of a swastika carved into the forehead of Charles Manson. But, in the opening paragraphs there is something missed by almost everyone…in the midst of ole Charlie’s ramblings is the evidence. Evidence so solid that it will save and eventually usher in a renewal of free market principles around the world.
For decades now the likes of Albert ”Alfonse Corleone” Gore, William “Cigar-Boy” Clinton, Julia “Carbon-Tax” Gillard, and Barack “Barry” Obama have told us their prophecies, based on “science”, relative to the harm we humans were causing our fragile planet. Their “science” has recently been discovered to be….hmmmm…wanting facts. Despite this “temporary” set-back, the Climate Change Coup Pack (CCCP) charges ahead with administrative efforts (not legislative, because the peasants are growing wise) at curbing that which most life on earth either exhales or uses as fuel to produce that which most life inhales.
Many skeptics of anthropogenic climate change spend a great deal of time, resources, and effort at discovering, analyzing, compiling, and presenting PROOF that the CCCP are simply wrong and that the efforts of the CCCP are designed to strangle the last bits of life out free-market capitalism and go full-bore toward an absolute central-planning system (global, mind you).
The CCCP supporters always point to “the science” and tell us that “the science” is not wrong…just misrepresented, misinterpreted, mislabeled, misspelled, misplaced, mismatched, misunderstood, misaligned, missing, or just missed it. It always seems as if the CCCP “science” isn’t quite as exact as REAL science is supposed to be. It is here, where CCCP “science” meets REAL science, that the truth of this supposed anthropogenic climate change is found. A truth that is irrefutable!
Enter Charles Manson…a certifiable lunatic (by ANY definition employing virtually ANY standard) who has been scientifically tested probably more than any single human on this thriving planet. Each and every scientific test performed on Charlie return the same result: He has absolutely NO connection to reality. Every rambling moment, every twisted thought, every conclusion, and every decision this dude makes originates from LALA-Land. Ladies and Gentlemen, policy-makers, policy-advisors, legislators, global delegates, citizens of this big blue ball…if Charles Manson says it is so…that is PROOF that it can’t be so!
In this obscure interview of Charles Manson hides the key to FREEDOM…Freedom from government interventions and usurpations of power. Freedom to once again let people produce in ways the market dictates, not government. Ole crazy Charlie has finally (though unknowingly) done a good deed. By siding with the CCCP he has provided the evidence and revealed the truth — only lunatics with a bastardized view of reality can hold the ”science” of the CCCP as plausible. I knew those eyes pierced more than the souls of his cult followers…look into the eyes of the CCCP and you see shades of Charlie — the need to CONTROL!
LINK TO DAILY MAIL ARTICLE: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1378178/Charles-Manson-breaks-20-year-silence-40th-anniversary-gruesome-Sharon-Tate-murders.html#ixzz1JvM4PhyQ
(NOTE: Approximately 6 hrs after the interview article was published at Daily Mail, the title changed to: “Global Warming Must be True, Charles Manson Believes It…” You can read my original remarks on this at http://www.facebook.com/update_security_info.php?wizard=1#!/howardhouchen/posts/206710839351330?notif_t=like and you be the judge).
Gadaffi’s Curse Keeps Haunting Washington
| March 26, 2011 | Posted by Sandra Crosnoe under Feature Post, News, Social Networking |
|
Gadaffi’s Curse Keeps Haunting Washington by Eric Margolis Recently by Eric Margolis: CIA Rambo Escapes Pakistan The finest strategic thinker of the 20th century, Britains Maj. Gen. J.F.C. Fuller, wrote the object of war is achieving political goals, not … Continue reading Guess What, Barack? We Have OUR Keys Back!
| November 4, 2010 | Posted by houchen2010 under Choctaw County, Economy, General, OKG Multimedia, Video |
|
We, the People…Have the Keys!
Howard Houchen
In early 2010 Barack Obama’s handlers developed an analogy for him to splash about the airwaves and repeat at public appearances (over, and over, and over, and over, and over again). The analogy was one of Republicans driving a car (the U.S. economy) into a ditch (deep recession) and the Obama Rescue Crew is called in to salvage the car and get it moving along the road to recovery. As the story goes, the self-proclaimed Master Mechanic Obama and his Pit Crew (the Lackluster-Lackeys), successfully dislodge the car (the U.S. Economy) from the pit of despair (recession) and put it back on track only to have the Republicans ask for the keys back. Pit-Boss Obama then tells us that “you” can’t have the keys back. Hmmm… It has always been my contention that what THESE folks did to THAT car while it was at its most vulnerable could more readily be described as “vehicular stripping” and that the man in charge should be known as “Chop-Shop Barack” and that THOSE keys were never HIS in the first place. Guess what? The election results of Nov. 2, 2010 proved me, and tens of millions of American citizens, RIGHT! Those keys are OURS and it is you, Chop-Shop Barack, who possesses no authority whatsoever to decide who gets the keys to OUR economy…They belong to We, the People! With a mighty heave and a resounding opening salvo, the citizens of these United States of America firmly rejected the policies of a central-planning “Ruling-Class” who incorrectly believed they were the “Keepers of the Keys”. With this clear and concise action, Washington can no longer mistake our wishes. Yes, we have our keys…BUT…we must secure them with vigilance and dedication to our stated principles. We must never again allow citizen non-participation in this great American experiment in self-government to empower those in legislative positions whose philosophies run counter to OUR founding principles. We ALL must stay engaged and steer OUR course. As citizens, we are the “Keepers of the Keys” and with this comes the responsibility of ensuring our drivers steer a straight course, a course we have set for them. Any deviation from the course that leads to greater freedoms, less government interference, lower taxes, more economic freedom, and security in our blessing of individual liberty must be met with swift and clear action on our part. Yes, we have our keys but what we do with them from this point forward will be the defining characteristic of this movement to restore America to the mantle of history’s greatest and lasting achievements.
